• MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Heat pumps take outside heat into the building, which means per kWh of electricity they produce more then 3 kWh of heat. Since hot water can be stored with ease, all it takes a big water tank with good insulation, hydrogen storage is not needed in this case. Also there are to the best of my knowledge no boilers able to burn both 100% hydrogen and 100% natural gas. The 100% hydrogen ones are even more expensive then heat pumps right now. That is to purchase running them is even more expensive.

    This is a fairytale to pretend hydrogen can just be used instead of gas to not see a huge push for heat pumps, but keep gas infrastructure in place.

    • Bernie Ecclestoned@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The cost to rip out all boilers and replace them with heat pumps is a fantasy. You’re looking at 10k with all the tanks etc. Not going to happen.

      As a transition fuel, green hydrogen makes sense, new boilers can burn a hydrogen mix and all the gas pipes in the UK are in the process of having plastic inserts installed so hydrogen won’t escape.

      You either make hydrogen with renewables, with the cost on a par with fossil fuel methods, which is already happening, or have to use batteries, batteries are full of rare earth minerals and are also expensive.